click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
after hezbollah convoys, taking out weaponry. i find there is nobody in israel that i met that since the united states -- maybe you think this is a big mistake --of all the people i talk to, cannot meet anyone who thought the u.s. would be decisive in syria. they see it as such a mess that they do not see how it will be reversed. at the same time, they are concerned about has allowed -- about hezbollah taking weapons into lebanon or keeping them in parts of syria as a depot of the run. there are a lot of israelis who want to start being more proactive in firing on has blocked convoys -- on hezbollah convoys. the israelis are stunned that russians have given an anti-ship missiles that can hit things in israeli ports grid these are very advanced missiles. -- ports. these are very advanced missiles. it is defense for them. at the same time, israel feels that there might be certain defensive measures. we asked them -- they are not out to doing any sort of border zone like they did in lebanon. i think the discussion on syria, some believe the country is disintegrating, some believe the re
of more convoys coming from our shipment of arms and nuclear arsenal, from syria to hezbollah. the question will come, what will happen the day after. they are fears in israel that either hezbollah or an agent of al qaeda will try to confiscate the storage of nuclear, chemical arsenal, in the case of these few hours when the regime actually falls. and in that case, israel is considered to have a ground assault into the specific locations of these bunkers. >> to secure the chemical weapons. >> to secure them. and that might i would say that might come in a contradiction with american interests. that would try to form or to support the rebels, without intervening militarily on the ground. and i think that israel wants to be sure that the united states completely approved the israeli point of view that the first priority would be to prevent either hezbollah or al qaeda forces to get hold of the strategic weapons, strategic weapon are the scud missiles and the chemical arsenal. >> from what i'm hearing from american officials, the u.s. might take that action unilaterally on its ow
brewing in the israeli policy circles about how active should israel be in going after hezbollah convoys, take ought strategic weaponry? israel ills not -- i find that there's no one in israel that i met thinks the united states -- maybe you think this is a big mistake and i'm not talking to the right people, but of all the people i talked to i didn't mean anyone that thought the u.s. would be decisive in syria. they just see the ute as such a mess, they don't see how at it going to be reversed. but at the same time they're concerned that hezbollah and taking whatever weapons they can, either into lebanon or keeping it in a part of syria they deem friendly as a kind of a depot of their open. here there are a lot of israelis who want to start the more pro-active hezbollah conveys there, that -- that convoy, the theys are stunned the russias have given this antiship missile which can hit things in the israeli port before they leave the port. very advanced missiles. and they're wondering where hezbollah is going next. so i it's not reshaping syria. they think that's above their pay grade bu
chemical weapons in syria. they have hezbollah in their north. they have iran trying to build a nuclear weapon to eliminate them. the muslim brotherhood president of egypt. that strikes me as attacking the victim. >> greta: let me talk about the bigger picture issue. is this impossible for an american president? so many tried it, so many secretary of state's tried it and we manage the crisis from time to time, but the peace seems to be so elusive. >> i sometimes have trouble about being too candid about this. there is no peace process. this is nonsense. this is stuff western politicians do to feel good about themselves. hamas is dedicated to the destruction of israel. iran is dedicated to the destruction of israel. there are factions in syria dedicated to the destruction of israel. hezbollah is dedicated to the destruction of israel. muslim brotherhood want to destroy israel and elected the president. >> why did he go now in the second term? didn't seem to give much attention in the first term. why now? >> i have no idea. i think his polling numbers have gone badly because of the conti
circles about how active should israel be in going after hezbollah convoys, taking out strategic weaponry? israel is not as, i think there's more, i find there is no one in israel i think mets the united states, maybe you say this is a big mistake and maybe say i'm not talking to the right people but of all the people i talk to i didn't meet anyone who thought the u.s. would be decisive in syria. they have kind of, i won't say written off as the united states. they see it as such a mess they don't see how it will be reversed but at the same time they are concerned of hezbollah end of season sale taking whatever weapons that they can either into lebanon or maybe keeping it in a the past syria they deem friendly as kind of a depot of their own. and here i think a lot of israelis who want to start being more proactive in firing on hezbollah convoys there. they hit as you know that sa-17. those, that convoy, israelies are stunned that the russians have given this thing called this anti-ship missile which could hit things in the israeli port before they even leave israel's port. very advanced
and it is not just al qaeda it is hezbollah and hamas are in there. ncouragement ofypt, we had the muslim brotherhood presidency which more and more we find out, it has been an effort to undermine everything in the middle east, and of course iran and that problem is not going away. the president has made a bold move in the middle east and i think in terms of these we countries silt not working. >> let me say about the chemical weapons he had the head of the intelligence committee saying it appears they used, the syrian government, syrian weapons outside aleppo, i think it was. the president, in israel, at a press conference, said he didn't think they did use it. now, the intelligence committee, and the chairman, he is get that from the obama executive branch. someone is telling them one thing and the president is saying something else. they need to get their act in gear. >> the republicans put together, some of them, a report that they called an autopsy, why they called it an autopsy i have no idea but that is the word they used, 100-page report saying certain positions on social issues, gentleman, a
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)